On 08/20/2015 11:09 PM, Jason Merrill wrote:
>
> Absolutely, a non-fast-forward push is anathema for anything other people
> might
> be working on. The git repository already prohibits this; people that want to
> push-rebase-push their own branches need to delete the branch before pushing
> again.
>
> There are many opinions about best practices, but I don't think any of them
> are
> enough better than what we already do to justify a change.
Regardless of what the non-fast-forward-push policy will be (please don't get me
wrong - I'm not trying to meddle into development of policies), why is deleting
and pushing a branch again better than pushing with force? AFAIK, git tracks
remote branches just by their names, so, for example if user A checked out user
B's branch, and B later deleted it and pushed again after, perhaps, rebasing
locally, then user A will get a conflict, if he tries to pull (same result as
with "git push -f").
--
Regards,
Mikhail Maltsev
